Warner Hedges on Virginia Schools' Anti-Gun Policies

[Mark Tyson]

Warner Hedges on Virginia Schools' Anti-Gun Policies
Updated: Friday, Aug. 29, 2003 - 4:28 AM EDT.

By BOB LEWIS
Associated Press Writer

RICHMOND, Va. (AP) - Gov. Mark R. Warner hedged slightly Thursday on whether a state law allowing students to leave unloaded hunting guns locked inside their vehicles on school property will trump local school boards' zero-tolerance firearms rules.

Attorney General Jerry W. Kilgore, at the request of a state senator, is reviewing whether local schools may banish weapons from campus, even though state law allows unloaded guns on school property if they are locked in a car trunk or closed container.

The Rockingham County School Board approved a total ban of firearms on school grounds. Warner this year signed into law an amendment adopted by the General Assembly that exempts students who hunt and lock their guns safely away from school gun bans.

A caller to Warner's monthly radio question-and-answer show on WRVA-AM in Richmond said some school boards have policies that would expel or suspend students who bring guns onto school grounds as state law allows, the caller said.

If Kilgore issues a formal opinion against the school boards' positions, he asked Warner, "is the state willing to take action to enforce the state's own laws against the school boards?"

"I was intrigued to see the school board, with its zero-tolerance policy, how that does conflict with the law," Warner replied. "In my mind, it's pretty clear. The law's pretty clear that students do have that right."

But he qualified his answer, saying his only knowledge of the issue was what he had read in newspaper accounts.

"My only caveat I'd put on this ... is I'd like to get a little more facts than just a newspaper article before I fully weigh in on it," Warner said.

Warner also defended the decisions by state-supported colleges and universities to admit high numbers of out-of-state students, even though it makes it tougher for in-state students to gain admission.

"That's one of the reasons why we have nationally ranked universities. It's one of the reasons why U.Va. and (The College of) William & Mary are No. 1 and, I believe, No. 3, in terms of national rankings of universities, and there is some value, I believe, to bringing a more diverse student population," Warner said.

As Virginia, William & Mary and Virginia Tech gain in national academic prestige, Warner said, they have brought other schools, such as James Madison University, up with them.

Warner said the overall percentage of out-of-state students has not risen dramatically, but their presence helps Virginia's public colleges and universities meet their budgets because the much higher tuitions non-Virginia students pay offsets costs for in-state students.

"It is a financially driven equation. Out-of-state students pay about 130 percent of the costs," the governor said.

"For every in-state student, the difference between the tuition and the in-state costs is about $6,000 that the university has to cover. Part of the way they cover that is by state support, but part of the way the cover that is by charging out-of-state students," he said.

Warner next week begins a series of weekly announcements detailing his major 2004 legislative initiative to reform education from grade schools through college.

(Copyright 2003 by The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.)

 

[Norton]

I'm going to take what I suppose will be a very unpopular stance on this. I used to teach in the very school system mentioned in the article.

While this is indeed in the middle of hunt country and I acknowledge that there are many students in that area (Shenandoah Valley for the unfamiliar) who could certainly outshoot me, I've got to admit that just immediately opening the floodgates of allowing teenagers to have firearms on campus is somewhat unsettling.

I understand that the point of the argument of the article is that local law can not hold one to a higher standard than state law. However in this specific instance, I think that the Rockingham County Schools may be correct in taking the cautious road.

In my 15 years of teaching, I've seen many a good kid have a bad day and make an unwise choice of violence or say something that may provoke violence.

By simply turning off the law, as it were, without the proper infrastructure of training, instruction and good ol' maturity beyond that of the average teenager, perhaps this is not in the best interest of the pro-2nd ammendment advocates among us.

I've stated on at least a couple of previous occasions that I am for allowing armed adults to work in the schools as a deterrent to potential Columbine or other terrorist type violence, yet I am uneasy with the thought of teenagers with their hormonal driven emotions having firearms nearby in an environment as socially volatile as a large high school.

I've had my eye on this story for a couple of weeks in the newspaper local to that area (still read it online most everyday)........doesn't seem to be kicking up to much of a fuss down there.

 

[Henry Bowman]

I've got to admit that just immediately opening the floodgates of allowing teenagers to have firearms on campus is somewhat unsettling.

By simply turning off the law, as it were, without the proper infrastructure of training, instruction and good ol' maturity beyond that of the average teenager, perhaps this is not in the best interest of the pro-2nd ammendment advocates among us.

Seems to me that having ones freedom restored would be even more of a shock to an older person who has done without it for more years than these students have been alive. Norton, if you'll re-read your post objectively, you may see how bigotted it sounds.

 

[AZRickD]

"I've got to admit that just immediately opening the floodgates of allowing teenagers to have firearms on campus is somewhat unsettling. "

That's the same argument that the environmentalists used when we wanted to repeal the National 55 mph speed law. They said, "It's been 10 years since anyone has driven faster than 55."

Amazing that they thought we were that dumb to fall for such an argument.

Allow me to ease your troubled mind by linking you to a FiringLine thread I started several months ago. It's a treasure for just this debate.

Lawful Carry Of Guns In School Thread

Some snippets:

Litchfield, CA - years.... Man.... you going to make me get out the calculator to figure that out? 63-66, grades 6th through 8th. Used to carry either my .22 rifle or 16 guage shotgun to school on the bus. Would leave with principal and pick up after school. I and a couple of friends would hunt rabbits or ground squarrels on the way home. (yes on these days we would walk the 7 or 8 miles home) Would hunt ducks, quail or pheasant with the shotgun. Litchfield is a very small school located 20 miles east of Susanville. Heck we had 8 kids in my 8th grade glass and it was the largest the school had ever seen.

Lassen High School. 66-70. Used to leave our guns in our vechiles on School grounds. Most would have pickups with gun racks, with their guns in them. Until I got my drivers license I used to leave my in my older bothers car on those days that I was going hunting. Even a few of the teachers and the principal had their guns in their cars. The principal was an avid hunter as were about a 1/4 of the staff.

The only story I have first hand knowledge of when a gun was LEGALLY carried on school ground during school hours was during the annual school Halloween custom contest. One of the Kids fathers brough their AR-15 for their kid to use as a prop (with prinipcals permission oh course). Mind you this was around the early 80's in an East coast state..... Image even having a replica firearm at school for that now.... Oh God!

1960s in Wayland, MA. We're just 20 miles west of Boston, next to Framingham. There only was one school then in the center of town. It's now the Town Hall. The Sudbury River backs up to the school. Our club's caretaker, Paul R., and his brother went to that school. They lived in the Pelham Island Road neighborhood. During waterfowl season, they'd take the boat to school, along with their shotguns. They'd hunt in the morning before school and in the afternoons after school. When they got to school, they'd carry their shotguns inside the school and give them to gym teacher.

 

[Norton]

Geez....maybe it's the lack of face to face contact when trying to explain something that's inherent to the internet or maybe it's just that everyone is too quick to jump someone's %^&* when they don't agree 100% with the crowd.....but lighten up guys.

If you've read anything that I've posted before at all, you'll find that I'm as pro-gun, pro-2nd as the next guy here....all I'm saying is that there are shades of grey to every argument and that not every situation has a "yes" or "no" answer.

As I stated, I taught in Rockingham County for 3 years and for 6 years in the county to the south of there (Augusta). In fact, in Augusta Co, we taught hunter safety in the school and kids were given 1 day excused absence for hunting season. I concurred wholeheartedly with this policy even back in my pre-gun ownership days. I still do. In fact I remember that the athletic boosters had a gun raffle and that at least one principal in the county was a competition bench rest shooter.

If my memory serves me correctly it was OK for kids to have their hunting rifles on the gun rack in the truck even back in 1995.

The point that I raise concerning the Rockingham County policy is not whether the kids (or teachers) should inhererently be allowed to keep their rifles locked in their vehicles. I think that, ultimately it's OK. It is whether it should be done without the accompanying culture of responsiibility and edcuation that accompanies the exercising of that right as was the case in Augusta County.

There are many limitations on childrens' rights besides the right to keep and bear arms. There are laws governing their driving age, the right to drink alcohol, the right to smoke, the right to have sex. If we are prepared to say that children are mature enough to drive at any age, drink at any age, have sex at any age, then let's go for it and let them have all of the guns that they want at school.

To state once again for those that just skim: I don't have a problem with it....just make sure that there is appropriate education and training to go along with the responsibility of a 16-18 year old kid hauling around a rifle in his/her car.

 

[Henry Bowman]

It is whether it should be done without the accompanying culture of responsiibility and edcuation that accompanies the exercising of that right as was the case in Augusta County.

We don't disagree with the principle of your point. But it is no excuse to delay freedom. Get busy restoring the gun culture.

 

[The Reaper]

Norton,

Virginia requires Hunter Education Training for anyone born after 1970 or anyone not possessing a hunting license issued within the the past three years. The Virginia State Hunter Ed course is a minimum 10 hours of training.

Given the age of current high schoolers they would be born after 1970 so I can infer that they will or would have been required to attend the 10 hours of Hunter Education.

So assuming that these kids would tote rifles around in their vehicles for the purpose of hunting it seems to me that they will have required training.

You mention that there are laws governing various aspects of when youth are considered citizens for the purposes of drinking, having sex etc. There are laws for possession of firearms both nationally and at the state level. There are laws on the transportation of firearms both nationally and at the state level. Let the schools obey the law and let the kids obey the law. I say let them be citizens, and let them legally carry their long arms locked in their vehicles in accordance with the law.

 

[jimpeel]

Norton

We just had a thread, now closed, that covered just this sort of thing. They are accusing Judge Roy Moore of ignoring the law and comparing him to George Wallace standing in the schoolhouse door.

Now we have school boards doing the same thing.

For the record, I went to school at Calaveras High School in San Andreas, CA in the early sixties. Our school bus had a rifle rack. EWe would bring our .22s to the bus stop, get on the bus, and hand the rifle to the bus driver who would check it and rack it.

When we got to school, he would hand you your rifle and you would walk across the field to the gym where the coach would put the rifle in the corner of his unlocked office.

After school, we would go and shoot at the school range. If we missed the last bus, we would have to hitchuke the 24 miles home. Noone thought anything of picking up a fourteen-year-old kid with a rifle. Most would take us to our door.

Why were we so much smarter and trustworty then and what did we do to lose your trust? I would send my thirteen-year-old grandson afield today if there weren't so many ways to be harmed by the legal system. I trust him.

 

[Norton]

For all.....I agree 100% that the way things USED to be was better. I agree that the way things SHOULD be would be a darn sight better than they are. I agree, I agree......

However, I'm seeing things as they currently ARE and am saying that without fixing the overall lack of personal responsibility that is endemic to the students in high school today, we are fooling ourselves if we believe that allowing teenagers to carry rifles to school in their cars is going to further our cause.

We can all point out individual kids who are more than capable of handling the responsibility of handling a firearm. However the sad truth is that the majority of kids aren't able to do that. I teach some kids that I would trust with my life and would happily share a foxhole with, but the majority of them.....no way.

We could discuss for hours the problems of the modern public educational system and I would be the first to agree with you and, in fact, take the lead in pointing out those problems. But, let's face it, the majority of kids have been so dumbed down with MTV, indifferent politically correct teachers, etc, etc, etc that they only thing they can think about is themselves. Will they grow out of it? Sure, we all did , but the question is: Is a given 16 year old capable of exercising the same level of judgement as he/she will when they are 18? 21? 35? Are any of us just a little bit wiser, patient than we were at 16?

For you folks that haven't been to a school in a while, go on over there and walk around and ask yourself if you would want the majority of those kids walking around in the woods with you during hunting season (as they are right now, not as they should be or would have been if they were born back in the day). Then extend that to letting them drive around with that rifle in the trunk without any parental supervision....

remember, we're all on the same side...even if we disagree

 

[F4GIB]

I went to high school in Texas from 1960 to 1964. Since we could drive at 14, EVERY car in the parking lot had a gun in it! On the way home, we used to pull 30 feet off the road and shoot at cans in a arroyo. No one who drove by ever called the police. It was no big deal.

I can't believe WE were different human beings. The guns haven't changed either.

The difference, if there is one, was that the school districts expelled (really expelled, not just sent 'em home for personal schooling from a visiting teacher) troublemakers. Bad conduct had real consequences. Failure meant failure. No one cared about the little criminal's "self esteem." The problem isn't the kids, it is the school administrators without cajones." Dr. Spock's "nicey, nicey" doesn't work with s**t heads.

 

[Norton]

The difference, if there is one, was that the school districts expelled (really expelled, not just sent 'em home for personal schooling from a visiting teacher) troublemakers. Bad conduct had real consequences. Failure meant failure. No one cared about the little criminal's "self esteem." The problem isn't the kids, it is the school administrators without cajones." Dr. Spock's "nicey, nicey" doesn't work with s**t heads.

F4GIB,

You hit the nail on the head and without realizing it made my point. The kids are different for the exact reason that you stated.....no sense of consequences.

Cheers.....